Miryala Venkata Reddy v. The State Of Telangana

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.4501 of 2015 Date: 25-02-2015 Between:

Miryala Venkata Reddy and 7 others .... Petitioners AND The State of Telangana, represented by its Principal Secretary to Panchayat Raj Department, Hyderabad and 4 others .... Respondents HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE A. RAJASHEKER REDDY Writ Petition No.4501 of 2015 ORDER:

This writ petition is filed for a writ of Mandamus declaring the action of the respondents 4 and 5 in seizing the petitioners' vehicles bearing Nos. AP 24 TC 2776-AP 24 TC 2778, AP 27 X 8557-AP 27 X 8558, TS 05 UA 2547 - TS 05 UA 2548, AP 24 AR 9066-AP 24 TB 8104, TS 05 UA 4253- TS 05 UA 4254, AP 24 TC 4349-AP 24 TC 4350, TS 05 UA 0507-TS 05 UA 0506 and TS 05 EC 1112-TS 05 EC 1110-Tractors and Trailers respectively without following any procedure under statutes contemplated under section 9-Q Sub Section 7 of the Andhra Pradesh Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1966 as illegal and arbitrary and against the principles of natural justice and for a consequential direction to the respondents to give interim custody of the said vehicles to the respective petitioners forthwith.

2. It is represented by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in similar circumstances, this Court disposed of W.P.No.3747

of 2015 on 23-02-2015 giving certain directions and that the present case is squarely covered by the said judgment, which is not disputed or denied by the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Panchayat Raj (Telangana), Assistant Government Pleader for Revenue and Assistant Government Pleader for Home.

3. In view of the said representation, following the ratio laid down in the said judgment, the writ petition is disposed of directing all the petitioners to submit their independent applications for release of their vehicles before the competent authority and the competent authority shall, within three days from the date of receipt of such applications, examine whether the vehicles are used in committing the offence for the first and second time; and if so, consider directing release of the vehicles on payment of the prescribed penalty by each petitioners. If, on the other hand, the vehicles are found to have been used in commission of the offence, for three or more times, the officer concerned shall consider directing release of the vehicle after deposit of amount in accordance with Rule-12 of GO.Ms.No.15, dated 19-02-2015 and also on execution of bond along with an affidavit by the petitioners giving consent to produce the seized vehicles as and when required.

Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending in the writ petition, shall stand closed. _____________________ A. RAJASHEKER REDDY, J Date: 19-02-2015 Ksn